
Sidelights on 
Mexico 

By AN AMERICAN 



^^'^2 81915 






Some Facts Never Before Printed 



"Every man has a right to his chance in life. Nobody 
knows what he will do with it until the trial has been made. 
The constitutionalists ])ropose to give every man his chance." 

— General Lucio Blanco. 



L, O. Pub- lit!. 



The writer of this pamphlet has no investments in Mexico, 
and no motive except to place before any who are sufficiently 
interested to read it, some facts which are usually overlooked, 
and leave the decision to the innate sense of justice which abides 
in most men. Neither party in Mexico has any knowledge of, or 
responsibility ior its publication. 

This trouble was started in the United States, and it is an 
open secret that much of the money to keep it going was supplied 
from the same source. It does not take long to decide that 
American capitalists do not buy arms and ammunition for a 
foreign people without having some definite object in view, and 
it does not take the American common people long to iind out 
what that object is. Nine out of every ten have formed con- 
clusions which, differing in non-essential details, in the main are 
very nearly the truth. 

Mexico has suffered enough at our hands. All she asks 
now is to be let alone. She makes no protest at the non-inter- 
vention policy, and any inconvenience which she may suffer by 
reason of the exclusion of arms and ammunition from this side 
of the river will be more than compensated if the embargo can 
be extended so as to exclude all forms of activity in Mexican 
affairs. 



This pamphlet is intended for free distribution, and copies 
will be sent on request where stamps are enclosed to cover cost 
of mailing. 

Address, 




'fttd't^. ' ^^■"'■" v//<viv^-.^p^^ p. 1 1 i ^: U , , ( hica^. 



Sidelights on Mexico 



We Americans like to be shocked. For years we have de- 
rived our most delightful thrills of horror, as well as our most 
soothing sensations of superiority, from contemplation of 
Mexico. During the "piping times of peace" managers of the 
bull-rings at Juarez and Matamoras admitted that but for the 
patronage of Americans seeking to be shocked they would have 
been compelled to go out of business, whereas, they were able 
occasionally to import Bengal tigers to vary the sport, with a 
gratifying increase in gate receipts. Incidentally, they were also 
able, by this means, to confirm -the orthodox opinion of the "bar- 
barous" Mexican. 

In the main, there is no objection to these little spasms of 
indignant virtue ; it is merely a way we have, and is so well 
understood that nobody pays any attention to it now, unless it 
pisses the limits of mere self-congratulation and threatens to 
work harm to some one else. It passed that limit in the case*of 
Mexico some time ago. 

During the past three years the favorite space-filler with 
American newspapers and periodicals has been so-called revela- 
tions of horrors supposed to exist in Mexico. It begun with a 
rather notorious arraignment of the Mexican government in a 
monthly magazine, and has continued intermittently ever since. 

Protests were made by Americans and other foreign resi- 
dents in Mexico against the manifest injustice which was being 
perpetrated, these publications being no more the truth about 
Mexico than a history of child labor, white slave traffic, and 
political graft would be the truth about the United States. At- 
tention was called to the fact that Mexico was conscious of these 
evils and endeavoring to correct them as rapidly as the condi- 
tions of the country would allow, and that such a course was 
calculated not only to arouse opposition to the government and 
make its work more difficult, but might bring about an uprising 
which would sweep away all the good that had been done. 

5 



These protests were unheeded. The publications against 
the Mexican government continued. Then some people began 
to ask, "Why? Why this persistent attack on a friendly nation? 
If we must indulge in the diversion of plucking motes from our 
brother's eye, why confine our activities to Mexico? Why not 
Patagonia, or Afghanistan, or Rajpootana?" 

W^hen the worst fears of the cautious ones were finally justi- 
fied our first attitude was one of amused tolerance. "Let them 
alone," we said. "A little blood-letting will do them no harm. 
We'll stop them when the right time comes." 

That time has arrived. In a firm and dignified manner we 
have announced that it must stop. They have had their little 
revolution — which, according to our ideas, they must have once 
in so often ; they have sufficiently entertained themselves and the 
world at large; now peace must be restored in Mexico, and we 
have undertaken to do it. 

We are grieved that our well-meant overtures are not cor- 
dially received, and surprised to find both contending parties in 
Mexico insisting on their right and ability to settle their dififer- 
ences without outside interference. 

But this has not disturbed our serene faith in our right to 
make the demand and our ability ultimately to enforce it. By 
the simple expedient of blockading one party financially, and 
locking the doors of international commerce on the other, we 
may wait with equanimity for the result. We have virtually 
walled up a nation with the entire population in arms, with 
their passions inflamed to the highest pitch, and have made it 
impossible for them to secure the only means of settling their 
differences or protecting the foreigners who are still among 
them. Some outrages will inevitably be perpetrated which will 
cause other nations to demand the protection of foreigners by 
the United States, and we shall then be able to send armed 
troops across the border with the consent of the world. The rest 
will be easy. Verily, it is an ill wind that blows nobody any 
good ! 

The constitution of the United States of America provides 
that its law-making bodies shall be composed only of Ameri- 
can citizens of given age, and residence in the country. The 
right and privilege of a voice in deciding national issues, even 
to the extent of an individual vote, may be obtained only after 
residence within our borders for a stipulated length of time. 

6 



I 



The same provisions are made in the constitution of the United 
Mexican States. The grounds on which we demand that Mexico 
make an exception in our favor at this critical period have not 
yet been stated. On the face of it, only two reasons appear to 
be possible; one is, our superiority in the art of government, 
and the other is our good intentions toward the nation. A care- 
ful and impartial review of the facts in the case may enable us 
to determine the extent to which our demands are justified on 
either one of these counts. 



The history of Mexico is the exact opposite of that of the 
United States. Colonists came to this country from Europe to 
build up, but in Mexico they came to tear down. During the 
centuries while our government was in course of construction 
Mexico was being raked and harried by other nations intent only 
on plunder. Her civilization was obliterated, her temples and 
palaces laid waste, her princes slain, and revolution and chaos 
inaugurated. 

During the three hundred years of Spanish dominion there 
existed no administrative policy looking to the welfare of the 
people or the future of the nation. There was but one object, 
namely, to pay into the royal treasury the largest revenue pos- 
sible. The ambition of each succeeding governor was to surpass 
the last, and his tenure in office usually depended on his success. 
The only way to accomplish this was by the complete enslave- 
ment of the people. Mexico had flourishing industries at that 
time, but her factories were destroyed, her vineyards and olive 
groves obliterated, home production was forbidden and com- 
merce with foreign nations was punishable with death. 

More than three centuries ago the great serpent-skin drum 
on the temple of the war-god sent its last notes of doom across 
the valley, ushering in Mexico's long "Noches Triste." Two hun- 
dred years later the first ray of light crossed her horizon, when 
the parish priest of Dolores, Don Miguel Hidalgo, summoned 
his people around him in the early dawn of that memorable 16th 
of September and proclaimed the independence of Mexico. One 
hundred years ago the first Mexican congress assembled and 
declared the independence of the nation, freedom of slaves, and 
adopted a provisional constitution. 

7 



But the .adoption of a constitution did not insure peace 
and prosperity. Up to 1884 revolution and unrest prevailed, 
making material advancement difficult. In sixty-three years 
Mexico had five presidents, two emperors and one regency, en- 
joying th^ unusual variety of four presidents in three months. 

From this it will be seen that the actual period during which 
Mexico may be said to have existed as a peaceful republic is 
comprised in twenty-six years, from 1884 to 1910. She entered 
upon it without agriculture, without commerce, without manu- 
factures, with a debt of over two billion dollars, and with a 
population of homeless, impoverished, ignorant, hopeless people. 

Instead of taxing the people to maintain an expensive army 
and navy, the attention of the government was directed to the 
promotion of internal growth. All its energies and resources 
were conserved and utilized for increasing home production, in 
order to cheapen the cost of living and provide a surplus for ex- 
port. The bandits who hitherto had made the name of Mexico a 
terror were converted into the Rurales, and made to serve the 
country in maintaining law and order. Schools, reformatories 
and hospitals were built, public utilities provided, and a system 
of free instruction installed. 

In 1895, instead of a deficit in Mexico's budget, there was a 
substantial sum in the credit column, and from that date to 
1910 she was one of the few nations whose receipts grew steadily 
in excess of her expenditures. Mexico's annual report of 1909-10 
showed a foreign trade of $227,451,908; 11,585 miles of railroad 
constructed since 1884, and, in addition to many institutions of 
higher education, twelve thousand primary schools in which one 
million pupils were receiving free instruction. 

Incidentally, certain Mexican states had experimented suc- 
cessfully with some economic problems of value to civilization. 
Over against Mexico's much advertised prison horrors was one 
little-known state prison which might have served as a model 
for the world. It was operated on the theory that the object of 
punishment is the reformation of the criminal, and all of its ac- 
tivities were directed toward that end. The inmate of this in- 
stitution entered on a course of training, mental, moral and phys- 
ical, under the best masters who could be provided. Regardless 
of age, half of each day was spent in school, and the remainder 
working at a trade. The output of prison labor was marketed 
to the best advantage, and a certain per cent of the proceeds 

8 



deposited at interest and paid to the prisoner on his liberation, or 
to his family during the term of his incarceration if he happened 
to be a married man. At the expiration of his sentence he was 
not left at large to return to his old manner of life, but was 
placed in a position which had been secured for him and for 
which he had been trained in the prison. 

In 1910 Mexico had one city of 60,000 inhabitants which 
held the record for the smallest police force, the lightest criminal 
docket, and the least drunkenness of any city of its size in the 
world. It had solved the problem of temperance and good gov- 
ernment by the simple process of making the saloon-keepers 
the custodians of the_ public peace. Each saloon-keeper was 
policeman ex-officio, in a certain district adjacent to his cantina, 
and a drunk, plain or fancy, occurring within his jurisdiction 
automatically voided his license. 

If we can show a better record during any equal period 
under approximately similar conditions we will have demon- 
strated our right to demand that Mexico defer to us in matters 
of government. 

Hark! Did some one ask, "Why, then, this revolution?" 
Turn back to the beginning and read more attentively. 

No one claims that Mexico had a perfect system or an un- 
impeachable administration. What might have been done to 
correct it by peaceable means will never be known. It required 
the stern virtues of a man like General Porfirio Diaz to lay the 
foundations and begin the work. He was as truly the man of 
the hour in Mexico as was Washington in the United States. 
His methods may have been despotic, but it required despotism 
to protect the weak, not only from the strong but from them- 
selves. He may have been cruel, but it was the cruelty of the 
surgeon who must sacrifice some members that others be main- 
tained in health. He dared the censure of the world and the 
hate of his own people, and carried his life in his hands with a 
serenity possible only to one who cherishes a purpose dearer 
than life. But General Diaz was growing old. A new generation 
had arisen in Mexico, a generation which through the means 
provided by him had passed him in enlightenment and progress. 
It was the old, familiar fireside story written into the history 
of a nation; the father outgrown by his sons, and, ignorant of 
their arrival at man's estate, still striving to enforce his au- 
thority. But he stood the test, and gave the supreme tribute 

9 



which age renders to youth, when he consented to retire to 
oblivion in the vain hope that his people might have peace. 



The component parts of a nation are the country, the people, 
and the laws. The greatness of a nation, therefore, is based on 
the extent of its resources, the strength of its people, and the 
wisdom of its law^s. A little more than three-score years ago 
.Mexico was, on the first of these counts, the greatest nation on 
the North American continent; and but for the intervention of 
a greater on the second, a different history had been written in 
the western hemisphere. The domain of Mexico included all of 
the present republic and the states of California, Utah, Nevada, 
Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and part of Colorado. The ac- 
quisition of that territory by the United States marked the turn- 
ing point in the history of both nations. It was the first step 
in our policy of expansion, without which the second, nor the 
third, nor any subsequent step, had been possible. 

Various attempts have been made to justify the methods by 
which it was acquired, but the best that the most biased Ameri- 
can has been able to offer is "manifest destiny;" the manifest 
destiny of the strong to supplant the weak. It was manifest 
destiny which enabled the early settlers in the United States to 
buy the land of the Indians for glass beads and hand-mirrors, and 
when the desire of the aborigines for beads and hand-mirrors 
failed, impelled the aforesaid settlers to exterminate the owners 
of the land. It was manifest destiny operating in Mexico during 
the Diaz regime, in the transportation of Yaqui Indians to the 
hennequin fields of Yucatan in order to open their lands for 
colonization. There were no cotton fields in the United States 
at the beginning of our occupancy, otherwise there might have 
been a precedent for Mexico's policy, llie Yankee is a thrifty 
soul, and he naturally hates to see anything go to waste. 

Mexico was less prepared for war at that time than the 
United States would have been in 1866. She was in the midst 
yi revolution and internal strife, there were no supplies for the 
army, no money in the treasury, and no credit abroad. There 
was absolutely nothing left but the country, a devastated and 
impoverished country, nevertheless their own, and they were 
prepared to defend it as long as a charge of powder remained. 

It was not warfare ; it was Manifest Destiny behind the pol- 
io 



ished barrels of a thousand guns ordering Mexico to "stand and 
deliver !" So did Manifest Destiny bestow on us more than two-" 
fifths of the territory of this defenseless and unhappy nation, and 
so has she continued her favors toward us ever since, adding to 
our possessions, and enlarging our borders, down to that last 
and most valued gift of all, the Panama Canal. Already some 
other nations are anxiously inquiring whither this is tending. 
Let the South American republics beware! It may be easier 
to stay the progress of Manifest Destiny at the Rio Grande than 
at the Panama Canal ! 

But we paid for the land. We insist on due credit for that. 
We had as well taken it without paying in so far as Mexico had 
the ability to prevent. We paid fifteen millions for a territory 
which is today worth many billions. 

"But it is worth this because Americans have made it so," 
some will urge. Not entirely. Largely it is what Mexicans have 
made it. It was Mexicans who laid railroad tracks and strung 
telegraph wires, Mexicans who constructed storage dams and 
irrigation canals. The thing that drew capital to the Southwest 
and made its rapid development one of the wonders of the cen- 
tury was cheap Mexican labor. He is popularly dominated a liar 
and a thief and an all-around undesirable citizen. Nevertheless 
the Mexican is the real maker of the great Southwest. 

Our principal grievance against Mexico appears to be her 
failure to adequately protect Americans who went to that coun- 
try voluntarily for the purpose of enriching themselves through 
the exceptional opportunities there afforded. How fared it with 
the Mexicans, who, through no will of their own, became subject 
in person and property to the United States, and who brought 
their wealth with them.? 

Most of the land in our newly-acquired possessions was con- 
tained in large tracts known as Spanish Grants, then intact and 
in the possession of the direct heirs of the original grantees. 
They were the richest people in the country; now they are the 
poorest. The records show comparatively few instances where 
they sold the land. How did it happen? 

They were told that the United States guaranteed the titles 
to them and their heirs forever. That was sufficient; and they 
still point to that "forever" with wonder and perplexity. No 
one advised them of the liberal limitation laws whereby the wise 
and wary might obtain the property of the ignorant and unsus- 

11 



picious. In most instances the granting of patents is discretion- 
ary with the local commissioner. In distributing favors he is 
not hampered by any restrictions requiring proof of the rights 
of the patentee, or the necessity of notifying the owner of 
record, by publication or otherwise, to protect his rights. The 
fortunate individual who secures a patent, maintains discreet 
silence, and complies with the law for a short term of years has 
a good and incontestible title to the land. If the owner of record 
discovers it in time, if he has enough money to secure a lawyer 
who is willing to represent him against an individual influential 
enough to secure the patent in the first place, he may recover 
his land. "Quien sabe?" 

In some instances where the American speculator did not 
have time to wait for slower processes, or lacked the "pull" 
necessary to get a patent from the state, it was found compara- 
tively easy and equally effective to get the Mexican's signature 
to an alleged lease, which by the skillful insertion of a clause 
or two was of the legal effect of a quit-claim deed. When,4:ll^ 
period of the lease expired and the owner attempted to recl^irp 
his land he found the other party securely entrenched in his lim- 
itation title. 

It is not an easy task to maintain the faith of the relatives 
and descendants of these people in a government which will 
guarantee them in the enjoyment of their property forever, and at 
the same time sanction laws which enable others to deprive 
them of it without consent, without payment and without notice. 
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that they were not heirs 
to that meekness of spirit which centuries of oppression engen- 
ders, su])pose they were like free-born American citizens, wise 
to their rights and strong to assert them, as is the case with 
Americans now demanding indemnity from Mexico? Suppose 
that all the legitimate heirs to lands, the title of which was 
guaranteed by the United States in the treay of 1848, should line 
up and demand that those guarantees be made good? Suppose 
they should offer for our enlightenment, and for the enlighten- 
ment of the world, evidence of the multifarious methods which 
have been used in alienating the property from them? Ye gods! 
Just suppose ! 

This writer has watched a row of Mexicans, on Saturday 
night, file through an office building in a modern city of the great 
Southwest, each with a crumpled bit of paper in one hand and 

12 



some money in the other. They paused in turn before a dapper 
little clerk, who dropped the money in the till, wrote something 
on the paper and handed it back. These men worked all week 
grading streets and digging ditches, and Saturday night came in 
to pay the installment on their little home in the suburbs. They 
were the grandsons and great-grandsons of the original owners 
of that county. Neither they nor their ancestors had ever sold ; 
nevertheless, they were buying half an acre on the installment 
plan and paying $2,00 a week. 

Scattered through the Southwest are many fertile irrigated 
valleys. Beyond these valleys on the line which divides "the 
desert from the sown" are scattered "jacals," inhabited by old 
Mexicans, who look up with wondering, almost sig'htless eyes as 
the big automobiles of the new ranch owners go honking by. 
Thirty years ago all of these lands belonged to their fathers, who 
were rich dons, with fertile fields and many cattle. Neither they 
nor their fathers ever sold an acre, but it is all gone. Their 
haciendas are supplanted by modern ranch houses, and the crude 
ditches that carried water to their fields of frijolies and chili have 
made way for wide irrigation canals. They have nothing left but 
the miserable "jacal" and bit of adobe-enclosed garden, but noth- 
ing grows in the garden, for it takes many pesos to get water out 
of the big ditches of the rich Americanos. But they do not starve 
Oh, no! Down there with backs bent between the onion rows, 
or with hoe in hand on the canal bank are the legitimate heirs 
to the; land. They work cheaply, so there is always corn for 
tortillos and goat meat on Sundays! 

Survival of the fittest? Manifest destiny? Perhaps. But 
we have been talking about mutual confidence and the brother- 
hood of humanity. 

It is not the province of this article to deal with the com- 
parative merits and strength of the two contending parties in 
Mexico. All that it is possible for any one to know, outside of 
the immediate governing circles, is well known to every intelli- 
gent American. The federalists are in possession of the capital 
city with what is referred to as "the machinery of government," 
whatever that may mean. They also control an indefinite area of 
adjacent country. 

The constitutionalist party under the leadership of General 
Carranza is in control of an equally indefinite area. It is com- 
posed mostly of the younger generation of Mexicans, and has an- 

13 



nounced itself as standing for the principles propagated by Fran- 
cisco I. Madero, its first leader. Its principal tenets of faith are: 
Free constitutional government, impartial elections by the peo- 
ple, a division of the lands among actual settlers, and distribution 
of natural resources for the benefit of the people. In the state of 
Tamaulipas this division of land among settlers has already been 
inaugurated. Replying to the oft-repeated argument that in a 
short time a few men will have it all and the many be where they 
were before, General Lucio Blanco said: "Every man has a right 
to his chance in life. , Nobody knows what he will do with it 
until the trial has been made. The constitutionalists propose to 
give every man his chance." 

Recent trade reports published in New York show the State 
of Tamaulipas, where General Blanco is working out his theories, 
to be in better condition, notwithstanding the revolution, than 
it has been in many years. 



14 



LIBRPRY OF CONGRESS 




015 830 995 6 



